Polymer Handgun Frame Construction

[lee n. field]

I've owned both. The CZ-100 was a dog in terms of the trigger, but otherwise a good design. Had CZ done something to make it easier to shoot well (like using the basic CZ-75 fire control assembly rather than a striker that wasn't pre-tensioned by slide movement), it might still be around today. The CZ-100 felt much better in the hand than the Glock 17. The newer P-07 is a fine weapon, and far better than most realize -- like most CZs, it takes a while for people to discover their good attributes.

You and I, Mr. Sherrill, were actually PMing a bit back and forth on mine (2001-ish), back shortly after I got it, and wasn't sure I wanted to keep it.

After 5 years mine had needed warranty attention 3 times, and never got fully reliable, so I traded it off towards a used XD40 Service. I'm much happier with that.

At this point I wouldn't mind having one to tinker with.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

At different times I had both a 9mm and a .40 version of the CZ-100. (I think the .40 version came with a compensated* barrel, which I didn't care for.) I never had warranty issues or problems -- didn't keep either one all that long -- as the trigger just really put me off! I've had a bunch of CZs, over the years, but these were the only ones I GLADLY sold.

I recently picked up a Springfield XDm Competition .45 (5.25" barrel) when I had some gun money from a recent sale. I haven't shot it a lot, but it seems to be one of the better .45s I've owned. I will try to give it more of a work out in the coming months.

*I think the term I should have used was "ported barrel." I was shooting IDPA at the time and ported barrel weren't allowed.